Quantcast
  

Wednesday, April 23, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 72 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Obama, Romney make last-minute pleas in close race

By Kasie Hunt and Nedra Pickler

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 07:39 p.m. HST, Nov 05, 2012


COLUMBUS, Ohio » The White House the prize, President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney raced through a final full day of campaigning on Monday through Ohio and other battleground states holding the keys to victory in a tight race. Both promised brighter days ahead for a nation still struggling with a sluggish economy and high joblessness.

"Our work is not done yet," Obama told a cheering crowd of nearly 20,000 in chilly Madison, Wis., imploring his audience to give him another four years.

Romney projected optimism as he neared the end of his six-year quest for the presidency. "If you believe we can do better. If you believe America should be on a better course. If you're tired of being tired ... then I ask you to vote for real change," he said in a Virginia suburb of the nation's capital. With many of the late polls in key states tilting slightly against him, he decided to campaign on Election Day in Ohio and Pennsylvania, where he and Republicans made a big, late push.

The presidency aside, there are 33 Senate seats on the ballot Tuesday, and according to one Republican official, a growing sense of resignation among his party's rank and file that Democrats will hold their majority.

The situation was reversed in the House, where Democrats made no claims they were on the verge of victory in pursuit of the 25 seats they need to gain control.

National opinion polls in the presidential race made the popular vote a virtual tie.

In state-by-state surveys, it appeared Obama held small advantages in Nevada, Ohio, Iowa and Wisconsin — enough to deliver a second term if they endured, but not so significant that they could withstand an Election Day surge by Romney supporters. Both men appealed to an ever smaller universe of undecided voters.

More than 30 million absentee or early ballots have been cast, including in excess of 3 million in Florida. The state also had a legal controversy, in the form of a Democratic lawsuit seeking an extension of time for pre-Election Day voting.

There were other concerns, logistical rather than legal.

Officials in one part of New Jersey delivered voting equipment to emergency shelters so voters displaced by Superstorm Sandy last week could cast ballots. New York City made arrangements for shuttle buses to provide transportation for some in hard-hit areas unable to reach their polling places.

Judging from the long early voting lines in some places and the comments made in others, the voters were more than ready to have their say.

"I watch the news all the time, and I am ready for it to be over," said Jennifer Walker, 38, of Columbus, Ohio, who said she took time off from work to attend the president's speech during the day in a show of support. "I feel like he is getting better with the economy. I don't think it's hopeless. It takes time."

But Bryan Dobes, 21, a University of Iowa student from suburban Chicago, voted for Romney on Monday and said unemployment and spending have been too high under Obama. "He promised a lot of hope and change, and I'm not seeing it," he said of the president.

"No retreat, no surrender," sang rock icon Bruce Springsteen, warming up Obama's crowd on a frosty morning outside the State Capitol in Madison, Wis. The Boss then boarded Air Force One for his first flight. "Pretty cool," he judged it.

Romney had Kid Rock and the Marshall Tucker Band in the wings for his late appearances in Ohio and New Hampshire.

"This is it," the challenger said in a last-minute emailed request for campaign donations.

"I will lead us out of this economic crisis by implementing pro-growth policies that will create 12 million new jobs. With your help, I will deliver real change and a real recovery. America will be strong again."

In his longest campaign day, Romney raced from Florida to a pair of speeches in Virginia to Ohio and then an election eve rally in New Hampshire.

Obama selected Wisconsin, Ohio and Iowa for his final campaign day, an itinerary that reflected his campaign's decision to try and erect a Midwestern firewall against Romney's challenge.

Vice President Joe Biden and Republican running mate Paul Ryan of Wisconsin went through their final campaign paces, as well.

In Sterling, Va., not far from Washington, the vice president accused Republicans of running away from their record, but added, "a leopard can't change his spots."

Ryan started out in Reno, Nev., where he said the president has come up short in his promises to change Washington and repair the economy.

"This may be the best that Barack Obama can offer, but this is not the best America can," he said, before flying off to Colorado and Ohio. Then it was home to Wisconsin, where he is on the ballot for re-election to Congress in case Republicans were unsuccessful in the presidential campaign.

Conscientious to the end, supporters kept knocking on doors in search of a possibly decisive vote.

In Enfield, N.H., Obama volunteer Sarah Ayres recalled driving up a deserted dirt road, unsure if she would find the house she was looking for. She turned down a long driveway, she said, got out of her car, and was met by a friendly, white goat.

"There were no people home, but the goat was there, so I don't know if I should count that as a contact," she joked.

____

Associated Press writers Beth Fouhy, Donna Cassata and Stephen Ohlemacher in Washington, Steve Peoples and Ann Sanner in Ohio, Philip Elliott in Colorado, Jim Kuhnhenn and Matthew Daly in Virginia and Holly Ramer in New Hampshire contributed to this story.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 72 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(72)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
wondermn1 wrote:
Go Romney Go, America is not and should not be a socialistic country. We believe in working for success and pride in the good old USA. Welfare and government entitlements should not be a carreer!
on November 5,2012 | 06:13AM
thebostitch wrote:
DIDO!!!
on November 5,2012 | 06:18AM
Jonas wrote:
Dido?
on November 5,2012 | 01:36PM
DowntownGreen wrote:
Didn't she have a hit back in the 90's? "Thank You"?
on November 5,2012 | 03:12PM
thebostitch wrote:
Very sorry, I meant to say "DITTO"
on November 5,2012 | 06:03PM
Anonymous wrote:
This comment has been deleted.
on November 5,2012 | 06:46PM
thebostitch wrote:
You mean DIDO with an "L" in it?
on November 6,2012 | 12:43AM
IAmSane wrote:
LOL
on November 5,2012 | 09:22PM
DowntownGreen wrote:
It will be over tomorrow night... and the "spin" and excuses will start in earnest Wednesday morning in this forum. Gonna be fun to watch!
on November 5,2012 | 07:54AM
silvangold wrote:
Obama will serve another 4 years......and do a better job (again) than mitty boy
on November 5,2012 | 09:31AM
false wrote:
If not, what happens to the 26 luxury homes he rents for Xmas?
on November 5,2012 | 02:16PM
tiki886 wrote:
Obama has accomplished nothing in the last 4 years. His Presidency will be tossed upon the ash heap of history tomorrow as the most divisive and failed administration in the history of our nation.
on November 5,2012 | 04:05PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Hurricane Sandy and its aftermath demonstrates that the Presidential election is a choice between life and death. A strong and engaged Federal Government meant life for many who would've otherwise died under GOP "dismantle FEMA" rule. More importantly for Hawaii residents, consider what a Romney led Federal Government would do for Hawaii in a natural disaster situation. Do you have confidence that a Romney administration would send help? Do you have confidence that a Romney government would have pieces in place TO help even if such an "absurdity" (the federal government helping Hawaii - "pshaw") were to cross a "President Romney's" mind? It's life and death folks. That's no longer an exaggeration. Hurricane Sandy proves that.
on November 5,2012 | 10:11AM
hawaiikone wrote:
You're absolutely right. Romney would just ignore any catastrophe here, and simply say "tough luck". No federal assistance of any kind, Fox would probably deny the event even happened. Do you think before you post?
on November 5,2012 | 10:22AM
CriticalReader wrote:
I do think before I post. And, I'm very worried about the ramifications for Hawaii should Romney become President. I've come to that conclusion after a great deal of thought. I think it's absolutely nuts for any Hawaii resident to support a Romney candidacy (especially because. . . we don't have any trailer parks). Nothing could have cemented that view more than Sandy. But, go ahead, be as fatuously blowhard as you want. This ain't the Rush L. show. You can't hang up on me.
on November 5,2012 | 10:32AM
Oye_Como_Va wrote:
Who cares? Barrack Obama has already won re-election for the next 4 lame duck years, so now he and his entourage can go globetrotting around the world on Air Force One with the Hollywood in crowd. Hawaii and the Democrat congressional delegation can ask the residents to build an elaborate Obama library in Iolani Palace and rename Magic Island to Barrack Obama’s Vision of the Future Beach. Then maybe we will get the rail to run all the way through Waikiki Beach, U of H and Kahala. We could the name the rail after Daniel K. Inouye. The Oahu residents can afford to foot the bill for rail.
on November 5,2012 | 10:46AM
CriticalReader wrote:
The other problem with Romney backer types is that they just do not have good comedic timing, talent or sense. Of course, a good part of that is because of the lack of material. Their own mangling of the truth just is not funny. It's disturbing. And, it's tough to funnily spoof leadership designed to do good, like Obama's, while in the prior and next breaths touting policies of self interest and exclusion. So, you get attempts at comedy that fall waaaaaaaay flat.
on November 5,2012 | 10:56AM
hawaiikone wrote:
As this country has found out, we don't need a president with "good comedic timing". Sorry you're disturbed, but we have no money. It's China's, and they're watching carefully which way we go. That's the truth. Not mangled at all. So it may be tough, but this country doesn't need a comic, it needs a realistic leader. Our choice. Not only for us, but for our grandkids too.
on November 5,2012 | 02:24PM
CriticalReader wrote:
See, I understand that you WEREN'T trying to be funny. But then you go ahead and make a laughable response. It ain't the content that's funny, it's the act for others to criticize for either laughter or disgust - in just about equal parts. Both for its bald faced effort to change the subject, and the utter spin/lie cycle you turned the dial to. But to address your little diversion, you want China to have a reduced influence in America? Two basics: move the manufacturing jobs Romney PAC financiers patronize to the US, and require the owners of those businesses to pay a fair share of taxes.- both fundamentals of Obama's approach, and topics to Romney has promised yahoos like you he would never touch in order to win the GOP nomination.
on November 5,2012 | 07:51PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Yahoo? You simple clod. You want to force business to pay higher taxes and return all the jobs to the US. How's that gonna happen? Going to raise tariffs so high to make our products competitive? Make it illegal to buy anything except USA made? Force us all to pay triple for our goods? That'll work real well for the already declining middle class. Your efforts at resolving issues is indeed comical. And raise taxes on businesses at the same time to top it all off. Gonna have an isolated America, legislating itself away from the world's economy. Simply brilliant. What's even scarier is you actually believe yourself.
on November 5,2012 | 08:33PM
CriticalReader wrote:
What 'jobs" promised by Romney do you think are going to cure the ills of the economy Romney say he "knows" how to fix? More finance jobs? Finance what? More fast food jobs? Who's going to buy the fast food without a job? Raising tariffs? About time (assuming we have American produced products to protect - see, the rest of the world has been lukewarm in its demand for instant Macaroni and Cheese options - even the Chinese won't make that stuff). Here's the Romney/GOP fantasy position, which is precisely what you spout/spin: Low, inequitable tax rates, incentives to move jobs overseas to chase dirt cheap labor (and quality) without replacing positions, AND, notwithstanding the apparent cost savings, predatory pricing practices that have already doubled consumer prices in the last 10 years (again, notwithstanding and despite . . . lower taxes and cheap overseas manufacturing). The problem is, that equals EXACTLY where we are, which is in trouble. 8 years of neo-con Bush policies created a bubble that couldn't stay intact until the end of the third, and thankfully the last Bush Family term. Add in 2 years of cynical, partisan gambling with the future of US by a GOP gridlocked Congress, and you have exactly where we are: In trouble. The money grab at the heart of the GOP platform, and by those who've spent 100's of millions "PAC-ing" on behalf of Romney in hopes of making triple or quadruple their money back (through contiinued lower tax rates and the ability to profit by moving manufacturing job overseas) is just so obvious. It's mind boggling anyone below the level of Senior VP in a publicly traded US company would ever vote for Romney. Then again, talking the talk sure either makes you a Senior VP, OR gives you the grand illusion you might one day get there, huh? Plus, foreigner, lousy, "illegal immigrants" shouldn't be allowed to run the country anymore, eh? . . .
on November 5,2012 | 09:47PM
Jonas wrote:
Obama is also seeking to reduce taxes on businesses.
on November 5,2012 | 10:15PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Jonas, Obama and Romney WOULD both reduce the base tax rate for Corporations (Romney to 25%, Obama to 28%). But, Romney’s Corporate tax cut is a pure rate cut across the board with added tax breaks, including completely freeing US companies from paying US taxes on profits earned abroad (that’s NEVER. EVER). Obama’s tax plan includes numerous cuts, but all are either balanced by closing loopholes and taking back tax breaks, or are incentives for actual job creation on American soil or keeping jobs on American soil (e.g. a 20% tax credit for moving jobs back to America from abroad, and the closing of loopholes permitting deduction of the costs of moving jobs abroad). Obama would also cap the effective tax rate for manufacturers at 25%, and increase a manufacturing deduction. Romney’s tax plan is simply designed to pay back the PAC contributors that funded his campaign with lower taxes and tax protected foreign profits.. Obama’s is designed to spur real job creation.
on November 5,2012 | 10:49PM
hapaguy wrote:
hawaiikone you don't even know your own candidates position(s). I know it's hard because he keeps flip-flopping but in the Republican Debate back in June 2011 Romney was asked if he would "devolve disaster relief to the states" and Romney replied "Absolutely" then further added that "it would be even better if those responsibilities were left to the private sector, because it's ALWAYS better for the private sector to do anything". Do YOU think before YOU post?
on November 5,2012 | 03:10PM
hawaiikone wrote:
He didn't "devolve"anything. He affirmed his position that reducing government means the states have to become involved, and the best scenario would be for private industry to take over a lot of govt. services. Asked specifically about disaster relief, he responded that it continues to be wrong for us to amass enormous debt our children's children will be paying for. Twist ti however you like, but do you really feel any president would not provide help during an emergency? If you simply feel the federal government has to provide you with everything you need, then vote for Obama. You may not like the price you'll have to pay for that "right" though.
on November 5,2012 | 04:03PM
hapaguy wrote:
I didn't twist anything. The moderator of the debate, John King, asked Romney if he would "devolve disaster relief to the states" and Romney replied "ABSOLUTELY!" It sounds like in your reply your agreeing that Romney position is that no federal aid should be given and that disaster relief should be the sole responsibility of the state in which it occured and "private sector" should help. Is that correct?
on November 5,2012 | 04:42PM
hawaiikone wrote:
At a Republican primary debate in June of 2011, CNN’s John King asked Mitt Romney for his views on disaster relief. “FEMA is about to run out of money, and there are some people who say, ‘Do it on a case-by-case basis.’ And there are some people who say, ‘You know what, maybe we’re learning a lesson here that the states should take on more of this role.’ How do you deal with something like that?” Mr. Romney responded ““Absolutely. Every time you have an occasion to take something from the federal government and send it back to the states, that’s the right direction. And if you can go even further and send it back to the private sector, that’s even better.” From the NY Times. To answer your question, yes, I agree with allowing the states more responsibility overall. It's called decentralization. Again, I ask you, do you really believe, if a state was overwhelmed, the federal govt. would not provide aid?
on November 5,2012 | 05:12PM
hapaguy wrote:
Hey I take Romney at his word. He has never once said the federal government should provide disaster relief but he has said he would defund FEMA. But I have to ask you: is this some kind of Republican trick? Or is it Republican logic? Because it sounds like you are agreeing with me that Romney believes it should be the states responsibility since that is what Romney said but then you turn around and say that the federal government should provide aid which is "Absolutely" not what Romney said... Which is it?
on November 5,2012 | 05:46PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Are you ever going to answer my question?
on November 5,2012 | 07:05PM
64hoo wrote:
read my reply i said to critical reader
on November 5,2012 | 03:41PM
64hoo wrote:
yes i have confidence in romney as a president and a republican in 1982 and 1992 with hurricane iwa and iniki we had reagan and bush as presidents who are republicans and we got help quickly so we woulld get the same quick help with romney as president.
on November 5,2012 | 03:38PM
hapaguy wrote:
64hoo you don't even know your own candidates position(s). I know it's hard because he keeps flip-flopping but in the Republican Debate back in June 2011 Romney was asked if he would "devolve disaster relief to the states" and Romney replied "Absolutely" then further added that "it would be even better if those responsibilities were left to the private sector, because it's ALWAYS better for the private sector to do anything".
on November 5,2012 | 03:44PM
group22 wrote:
This election is simple...if you think the Goverment is smarter than you, vote Obama. If you like being dependent on the Government and dislike helping yourself, vote Obama. If you believe in equal results, enjoy being in the middle class with no desire to become part of the 1% for you and your kids, vote Obama. Obama "pledges" to protect the middle class which means he will make sure you stay in the middle class....being average is great, isn't it?
on November 5,2012 | 01:03PM
hapaguy wrote:
No it's more like: if you believe every man for himself, vote Republican. If you believe we should throw the weakest, poorest, sickest people in our society under the bus so the rich can have more tax cuts and get richer, vote Republican. If you believe we should start unnecessary wars in countries like Iraq, vote Republican...etc...etc....
on November 5,2012 | 03:02PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Incredible. You should try out for MSNBC. You've got it all down pat. No reasonable approach at all, simply repeating the absurd talking points. Your attitude is exactly what drove Olympia Snowe from the Senate.
on November 5,2012 | 05:17PM
IAmSane wrote:
And you should try out for FoxNews, you hypocrite.
on November 5,2012 | 09:25PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Explain, you simpleton.
on November 6,2012 | 05:28AM
hawaiikone wrote:
My apologies. Name calling is inappropriate. To respond though, I very rarely watch Fox news, and if my comments seem parallel it is coincidental. When I read what I believe are extreme positions I respond, sometimes sarcastically. This is after all, a forum. I do on occasion watch Bill Maher, and am saddened at the disrespect shown. As with most disagreements, without respecting the credibility of the other side, little progress toward resolution can be made. I made reference to Ms. Snowe, her reasons for leaving the Senate exemplify my concern for our system today.
on November 6,2012 | 06:28AM
Jonas wrote:
I don't get it. You regurgitate Fox news stuff and then criticize hapaguy for repeating stuff on MSNBC?
on November 5,2012 | 10:18PM
hawaiikone wrote:
We have no money. That's not a fact? I really question whether we can survive another 4 years of borrowing. Fox or MSNBC have nothing to do with it.
on November 6,2012 | 05:36AM
Jonas wrote:
@hawaiikone. Who is "we?" If you don't watch the news, how do you know hapaguy is repeating the stuff they say? Guess i am just questioning where you get your information. I don't like the fact the govt is printing money at an unprecedented pace either. What is your suggestion in place of borrowing money?
on November 6,2012 | 10:05PM
false wrote:
Will Barry rent 26 luxury homes for Xmas again if he loses?
on November 5,2012 | 02:17PM
hapaguy wrote:
false you act like this is some major "dig" at the president. So what if he rents 26 houses! my gosh you are ridiculous!
on November 5,2012 | 02:58PM
64hoo wrote:
simple voting if you like your country america that your ancester fought for the love of this country and your freedom then you will vote romney. if you hate your country then vote for obama. simple choice.
on November 5,2012 | 03:28PM
hapaguy wrote:
I can tell from your post that english is a second language for you. I am glad that you are taking an interest in our politics even though you are dead wrong...
on November 5,2012 | 03:40PM
64hoo wrote:
no i am not wrong i am right because michelle obama said 4 years ago and this year at the DNC convention she said i now like america. like wife like husband they hated america until he came president but they still hate america. the obamas said it not me.
on November 5,2012 | 04:07PM
hapaguy wrote:
She said no such thing. She said she was proud of her country for finally electing a person of color to the White House. That is a fact. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.
on November 5,2012 | 04:29PM
64hoo wrote:
yes she did go watch the replay of the dnc convention and tv news even showed her saying that i know the truth hurts you but she said that i finally like my country.
on November 5,2012 | 04:40PM
hapaguy wrote:
Provide a link, if you can, to a video of her saying she "now likes america".....
on November 5,2012 | 04:46PM
tiki886 wrote:
ABC News Feb 18, 2008 8:24pm Michelle Obama: “For the First Time in My Adult Lifetime, I’m Really Proud of My Country”

Here's your youtube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvGalQ1YdcI

Enjoy.


on November 5,2012 | 05:12PM
hapaguy wrote:
tiki886. Thanks for proving me correct. She said she is proud of her country and did not say she "now likes america".....
on November 5,2012 | 05:28PM
Jonas wrote:
I don't really think this is too important. I don't believe she meant that she despised the country before this and all of a sudden loves it. Let's move on because this is not the important issue.
on November 5,2012 | 10:21PM
64hoo wrote:
and also hes not a colored president he is a 2 tone color president remember he is half white so you cant call him a colored president. i don't go by the pygmentation of there skin i go by there bloodline so we still don't have a first african american president yet. and thats the facts my friend.
on November 5,2012 | 04:47PM
hapaguy wrote:
I never said he was african american. I said he was a "person of color". You forget who you are replying to. My username is "hapaguy". I am half white and half asian. I consider myself a person of color because I look more asian (dark skinned, brown eyes, black hair) than white. I would suspect that President Obama would likewise. In any event, to the racists on the mainland, of which i have had experience with firsthand since I went to college there and lived there for over 14 years, I do not believe that because I am half white and the president is half white, they would consider us as whites......
on November 5,2012 | 05:14PM
tiki886 wrote:
The politically correct term is mulatto.
on November 5,2012 | 05:15PM
hapaguy wrote:
whoa brother! mulatto is not PC! Look it up! It is a historically derogatory word used during slavery days for a mixed race child. It is derived from the spanish word "moolay" for mule. A mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey......
on November 5,2012 | 05:23PM
Jonas wrote:
Again, I don't think this is an important issue. Let's not mince words. Let's get to the main issues here.
on November 5,2012 | 10:22PM
Jonas wrote:
@64hoo - what if I love my country and freedom, but I don't agree with Romney's view of abortion and women's rights, as well as his desire to protect the interests of the wealthy, and his constant flip-flopping on issues? Then can I choose Obama?
on November 6,2012 | 10:08PM
hawaiikone wrote:
Speaking in Milwaukee, Wisconsin today, would-be First Lady Michelle Obama said, "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback." While "64hoo" did not provide the exact quote, his comment does reflect Mrs. Obama having never in her life been proud of our country. An offensive comment at best.
on November 5,2012 | 05:23PM
hapaguy wrote:
Whats offensive about that? Are you not proud of your country for getting past its over 200 years of slavery and electing the first person of color to the white house? Are you not proud of that?
on November 5,2012 | 05:35PM
64hoo wrote:
hes not of color i mentioned to you he a 2 tone color president he is half white so quit calling him a man color he is a man of 2 colors white and black.
on November 5,2012 | 05:44PM
64hoo wrote:
remember when tiger woods won those master tournaments in golf and bill clinton said to woods you are the first african american to win these tournaments and woods replied i am half asian and never went to the white house when he was invited. thats why obama should say i am half white and half african american so he is not a full african american president.
on November 5,2012 | 05:52PM
hawaiikone wrote:
hapa, see tiki's comment below to explain it to you, although I'm quite sure you already understand.
on November 5,2012 | 07:08PM
tiki886 wrote:
Correct. Michele Obama's slight is even more tragic. She is disrespecting ALL Americans who sacrificed their lives for our Nation. Her insensitive remarks are coming from a source of anger and black militancy. She is, after all a marxist. She and her husband have no place representing the American people. She and her husband are a disgrace.

Imagine if she said to her daughter, "For the first time as your mother, you make me proud." That's offensive and disgusting.


on November 5,2012 | 05:44PM
64hoo wrote:
tiku886 go to google search and type in wild bill secret service secrets. he is a retired us marshall and gets alot of facts from his secret service friends who been assigned to the presidents from reagan to the obamas very intresting video.
on November 5,2012 | 06:05PM
Jonas wrote:
And probably doesn't really reflect what she wanted to say. Let's move on...
on November 5,2012 | 10:23PM
IAmSane wrote:
...so?
on November 5,2012 | 09:28PM
Jonas wrote:
Hey, I think it's fine to debate and defend your candidate. But there's no need for anyone to attack another for their views. Politics is always a source of tension because the parties tend to have quite different views. Let's try to keep it civil and respect each other's point of view. That being said, I can understand voting for Romney if you are male, upper class, don't care about women's rights, and/or are a Mormon. The guy just changes positions too much. How do we know the stuff he's saying today won't change once he gets in office?
on November 5,2012 | 10:13PM
group22 wrote:
Yeah right...vote for Obama because you know, based on experience, he will say stuff today and change once he retains his office. Remember what Obama said about the deficit? He changed and increased the deficit. Remember what Obama said about the unemployment rate? He changed and increased the unemployment rate. Remember what Obama said about bringing the country together? He changed and divided the country. Remember what Obama said about transparency? He changed and governed secretly. Romney changes positions too much and Obama is a man of his word. Yeah right....
on November 6,2012 | 02:30AM
Jonas wrote:
@group - there is a difference when you are trying to make changes in govt - you need the cooperation of the two other parties. He alone cannot reduce the deficit, unemployment rate, etc. And I am not saying that Obama isn't a politician - he most definitely is. But Romney wants to eliminate Pell grants in May of this year, then increase them in the second debate?! That's a quick 180. And he's against setting a deadline to pull out troops in the second debate - then agrees with Obama on pulling out troops in the 3rd debate? That's a quick position change, don't you think?
on November 6,2012 | 10:14PM
Pacej001 wrote:
LOL. "don't care about women's rights". Well, your civility sermon self-destructed after about two sentences.
on November 6,2012 | 05:10AM
Jonas wrote:
@ pace - that's my opinion based on his position regarding abortion and the fact that he did not support women's equal pay rights.
on November 6,2012 | 10:11PM
808comp wrote:
Obama,and Romney will say what they will do,but with a disfunctional congress nothing will get done. They can't do it alone. I think there should be more women in congress. This is my personal opinion. Have a good day folks.Hopefully all goes well, and we won't have a repeat of what happened in Florida few years ago.
on November 6,2012 | 04:00AM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News